Mr. Mariano Lucas Fernandes, Goa Velha V. ITO, ward - 1(1), Panaji

ITA 75/PAN/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Mariano Lucas Fernandes, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A)-2 Panaji, which upheld the Income Tax Officer's decision treating Rs. 12 lakhs of unsecured loans as unexplained income for the assessment year 2009-10. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not provide necessary details during the initial assessment and only submitted additional documents during the CIT(A) stage, which were not found satisfactory by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion on the matter.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 137000 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: DismissedDismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 15-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 30-06-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PRASAD PAWAR
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI ‘SMC’ BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.75/PAN/2020 Assessment Year 2009-10 Mr. Mariano Lucas Fernandes, H.No.67, Bhatim, Portel Bhat, Goa Velha, Goa – 403 108. PAN AAQPF0875Q vs., The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Aayakar Bhavan, EDC Complex, Patto Plaza, Panaji, Goa – 403 001. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Prasad Pawar For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikanth Date of Hearing : 16.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 24.01.2023 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2009- 10, arises against the CIT(A)-2 Panaji, Panaji, Goa’s order dated 26.02.2020, passed in case ITA.No.458/CIT(A)- 2/PNJ/2017-18, ITA.No.575/PNJ/2011-12, in proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The assessee’s sole substantive ground raised in the instant appeal challenges correctness of both the lower authorities’ action treating his unsecured loans of Rs.12 lakhs as unexplained in the course of assessment dated 29.12.2011 as upheld in CIT(A)'s order as under : 2 ITA.No.75/PAN./2020 3 ITA.No.75/PAN./2020 3. Suffice to say, it emerges during the course of hearing that assessee had not filed any of the relevant details during the course of assessment as per the observations to this effect in the assessment order. He chose to file his additional submissions before the CIT(A), which were referred to the Assessing Officer. The latter’s remand report dated 14.02.2020 [pages 28 to 29] makes it clear that the assessee’s 4 ITA.No.75/PAN./2020 very failure continued even in the said second round as well. Learned counsel invited my attention to the assessee’s detailed paper book running into 53 pages that the assessee had duly filed all the relevant details which can be now subjected to afresh factual verification. 4. All these assessee’s averments fail to evoke this tribunal’s concurrence once it has come on record that he could not discharge his onus of proving genuineness and creditworthiness of the unsecured loans of Rs.12 lakhs. I thus upheld the impugned addition in light of the CIT(A)'s foregoing detailed discussion. Ordered accordingly. 5. This assessee’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.01.2023. Sd/- [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 24 th January, 2023 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Ld. CIT(A) concerned. 4. The CIT concerned 5. D.R. ITAT, Panaji ‘SMC’ Bench, Panaji 6. Guard File. //By Order// Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.